| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| ŽObama considering Iran policy shiftŽ |
| 2009-04-15 |
| [Jerusalem Post Front Page] US President Barack Obama is working on a dramatic change in strategy with regard to the Iranian nuclear program, according to officials quoted by the New York Times on Tuesday. The shift in policy, according to the report, centers on the US dropping its insistence that the Islamic republic immediately cease all activity in its nuclear program during the initial phases of talks. The US would instead encourage Teheran to allow inspectors to visit its nuclear facilities. The aides quoted in the New York Times report said that Obama was still deciding exact details of the plan. "We have all agreed that is simply not going to work - experience tells us the Iranians are not going to buy it," a senior European official involved in the talks with the US was quoted as saying of the West's recent attempts to bring about a stop to the Iranian nuclear program. "So we are going to start with some interim steps, to build a little trust." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #13 Not only is Obama a prick, he is one dumb prick. |
| Posted by: Angolusing the Younger9830 2009-04-15 19:23 |
| #12 3.5 years of shifty EU talks got us where this shifty situation is today. |
| Posted by: Muggsy Glink 2009-04-15 18:28 |
| #11 Shify senior European official lacks the same thing the new administration does: credibility. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2009-04-15 12:26 |
| #10 I recall Jimmy Carter was President when the Iranians seized our embassy. Carter was a weak President. Negotiations were not effective. And exactly why will they will be now??? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2009-04-15 12:05 |
| #9 Somebody dig up Hans Blix, stat! |
| Posted by: mojo 2009-04-15 11:42 |
| #8 Still - is this proposed shift as predictable, and farcical, as it sounds here? The next question is does anybody…anybody see anything other then a containment policy as the ultimate “resolution” to the O-Team plan. The Dennis Ross plan calls for direct talks without preconditions. The theory is that this will signal an end to Bush’s cowboy diplomacy. And when the Mullahs still refuse to abandon their lust for nuclear weapons the Europeans will somehow grow a spine. Perhaps the real question is will the Israelis sit with an empty dance card during the 18 month Persian ballet. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2009-04-15 11:03 |
| #7 The US would instead encourage Teheran to allow inspectors to visit its nuclear facilities. Encourage? And exactly how is this going to be done? Send ACORN? Community organizing? Conflict resolution techniques? I thought Iran recently kicked out nuke inspectors. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2009-04-15 10:03 |
| #6 How's Iran's drought coming? Anyone know? We were selling them over a billion in wheat. What's going on with that? |
| Posted by: Penguin 2009-04-15 09:16 |
| #5 Maybe we could give 'stimulus tax credits' to the Mullahs for Hybrid Missles that work on Flex fuels? Throw in a few windmills to close the deal. |
| Posted by: airandee 2009-04-15 08:36 |
| #4 They aren't going to buy this step either. And why should they? Intransigence has proven to work for them. Eventually the West will say, "OK you can have a nuke, but only 1!" And the turbans will reply "But Mom, Ivan has thousands!" |
| Posted by: Spot 2009-04-15 08:27 |
| #3 "We have all agreed that is simply not going to work - experience tells us the Iranians are not going to buy it," a senior European official involved in the talks with the US was quoted as saying of the West's recent attempts to bring about a stop to the Iranian nuclear program. "So we are going to start with some interim steps, to build a little trust." WTF? Maybe it's just me. But essentially the idea is that a recalcitrant, defiant, mendacious regime is going to uh, build trust with us? So allowing some inspectors will build confidence that the regime's nuke weapons program is not still proceeding? So a concession in the opening round of a test of wills with a determined treacherous adversary with clear concrete objectives is supposed to .... lead where exactly? This situation - like a few others - is exceedingly difficult, and there are no easy answers. Still - is this proposed shift as predictable, and farcical, as it sounds here? |
| Posted by: Verlaine 2009-04-15 02:17 |
| #2 Just give the ayatollahs the GPS coordinates of Rome, Paris, Berlin and London and say The One's work here is done. |
| Posted by: ed 2009-04-15 00:37 |
| #1 oh... shift. Well that's too bad. I accidently misread that the first time through. |
| Posted by: Gluting Fillmore6653 2009-04-15 00:09 |